Anuj Rai @ Tinsuki Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45243 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -139 Year- 2016 Thana -RAJPUR District- BUXAR ====================================================== Anuj Rai @ Tinsuki Rai, Son of Ratandeo Rai, Resident of Village- Dehri P.S.- Rajpur District- Buxar.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Bajarangi Lal, Advocate Mr. Ashish Kumar Ghosh, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Ajit Kumar(APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 18-01-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Rajpur P.S. Case No. 139 of 2016 instituted for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of Arms Act. The allegation against this petitioner is that he caused fire arm injury to the informant by Katta. The informant was brought to Singh Medical Hospital, Varanasi. The police have mentioned in para-16 of the case diary that he went to Singh Medical Hospital, Varanasi, where he recorded re-statement of the informant, who stated the similar facts, what he has stated in his earlier fardbeyan. The statement of other witnesses have been recorded in para-55, 56 of the case diary, wherein they have stated

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45243 of 2016 (3) dt.18-01-2017 2/2 that they have heard sound of firing but they could not see, who fired but both the witnesses have stated in para-55 and 56 that the informant sustained fire arm injury. The police has mentioned about the injury report in para-78 of the case diary and the Xerox copy of injury report is also available in case diary, wherein doctor has found after x-ray of the abdomen one bullet in Pelvis and he opined that fire arm injury had been caused to the informant. There is serious and specific allegation against the petitioner of causing fire arm injury. Therefore, I do not find it fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail petition is hereby dismissed in Rajpur P.S. Case No. 139 of 2016, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buxar. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the court below within four weeks from today and seek regular bail which shall be considered and disposed of on merit without being prejudiced by this order.

(Sanjay Priya, J.) ravi/- U T